Law Commons^™

History And Tradition As Heightened Scrutiny, Andrew Willinger

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court is turning to methodologies privileging text, history, and tradition, or THT, to interpret and implement various constitutional provisions. The Court has recently endorsed historically-focused approaches to determine how the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and carry a firearm, how the First Amendment protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion, and whether the Due Process Clause protects reproductive autonomy, among other questions.

Much scholarship and popular commentary surrounding THT portrays the methodology as sui generis: presenting unique analytical challenges and impervious to direct comparison to existing doctrinal approaches. However, the jurist most …

Breaking Kayfabe, Thomas B. Bennett

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The membership of the Supreme Court affects how it decides cases. This maxim is well accepted among the public. But it is exceedingly rare for Supreme Court opinions to acknowledge this fact, even when it provides the best explanation for the Court’s behavior. And in the unusual instance in which Supreme Court opinions do refer to changes in the Court’s membership, it is jarring. This Article explores two questions that flow from these uncontroversial facts. First, why does it happen so rarely? Second, why does it happen at all?

To answer these questions, the Article looks to an unusual source: …

Pluralism In State Constitutional Law, Michael L. Smith

Georgia Law Review

Debates over constitutional interpretation rage on—with most parties staking out preferred theories, their justifications, and assertions of their utility in predicting, explaining, and critiquing court opinions. The United States Constitution and the Supreme Court take center stage, despite a rich set of cases and constitutions at the state level. At the same time, state constitutional discussions tend to steer clear of federal interpretive theorizing.

This article seeks to bridge the gap between these literatures, arguing that state constitutional interpretation practices demonstrate a pluralist approach that may inform broader theoretical debates. State courts frequently employ different methods—sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly—both across …

The Tenth Anniversary Of Marriage Equality: How Traditional Marriage Law Led To Constitutional Protection For Same-Sex Marriage, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This essay explores how the history of interstate marriage recognition law was central to the Supreme Court’s recognition of constitutional protection for the right of same-sex couples to marry. Prior to the 1990s, there were essentially no laws on same-sex marriage in the United States. That changed in the 1990s, when the Hawaii Supreme Court issued a ruling in Baehr v. Lewin that made authorization of same-sex marriage seem inevitable in that state. The threat fueled the adoption first of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996 and then mini-DOMAs in most states. Those laws were broad and …

Critical Constitutional Law And The Alito Palimpsest, William J. Aceves

Faculty Scholarship

This article uses an innovative metaphor—the palimpsest—and a provocative philosophical tradition—genealogy—to generate a new theory of critical constitutional law. It is a theory born from this unique moment in time.

Originalism is now ascendant at the Supreme Court. Its search for essential origins in history as a method for grounding extant constitutional values was used in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to end recognition of the fundamental right to abortion. The Court’s conservative majority has made clear that Dobbs is only the beginning.

Critical constitutional law uses the metaphor of the palimpsest to study law and the search for …

The Limits Of Tradition: Counterman, True Threats, And The Categorical Approach To Free Speech, Brett Zicari

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

Tradition is in vogue.[1] Across a wide variety of areas, the Supreme Court has embraced “history and tradition” as its primary methodology for determining the meaning of constitutional provisions.[2] Recently the Court has even suggested that a restriction on the use of names in trademarks could rest entirely on its traditional status,[3] but nowhere has this move toward tradition been as robust or longstanding as in the speech context. Since the 1940s, the Supreme Court has invoked tradition to defend content-based or categorical restrictions, and more recently, it has purported to rely exclusively on tradition.[4] The …

Crafting A New Maryland Two-Party Consent Law With A Nice Ring To It, Ryan Brooks

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

Picture this: Late on a dark autumn night, a teenage boy is staying at his godfather’s house.[1] Suddenly, the boy falls victim to unspeakable sexual abuse committed by his godfather.[2] Shortly thereafter, the boy escapes the house without his godfather’s knowledge.[3] To get help, the boy tries to get the attention of a neighbor.[4] He approaches neighboring house number one—no answer.[5] He approaches neighboring house number two—no answer.[6] He approaches neighboring house number three—and the homeowner answers the door by using his “doorbell camera.”[7] The boy states that there is an emergency and …

State Constitutional Rights To Privacy, Tiffany C. Li

Georgia Law Review

This article examines state constitutional rights to privacy, presenting a comprehensive survey of all states that have explicit rights to privacy enumerated in their constitutions. Understanding state constitutional rights to privacy is particularly critical now in the wake of the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which significantly restricted the scope of federal constitutional privacy rights. As states have the authority to independently interpret their constitutions, state constitutional law may provide a path forward for privacy.

In lieu of relying on federal rights protection, individuals may now need to turn to state constitutional rights …

State Constitutional Development And The Criminal Procedure Revolution, Quinn Yeargain

Georgia Law Review

Questions about which rights, liberties, and guarantees are included in the U.S. Constitution’s protections, and how they are protected, have long produced animated debate among scholars, judges, and advocates. Yet, while today’s debates may seem familiar, they take place at a perilous time in our country’s trajectory. We are six decades removed from the Warren Court’s criminal procedure revolution, and just a few years into the Roberts Court’s full-throated embrace of originalist jurisprudence. Whether many of the protections we have come to know and recognize from the Warren Court—the exclusionary rule, Miranda warnings, and Gideon’s mandate—are subjected to re-evaluation …

Rescuing State Punishment Clauses From The Deferential Doctrine, William W. Berry Iii

Georgia Law Review

A number of state appellate courts read any sentencing decisions by lower courts that are “within the statutory sentencing limits” as constitutional or presumptively constitutional under both the Eighth Amendment and the punishment clause in their state constitutions. This “deferential doctrine” ignores both the individual rights of criminal defendants and the role of state courts in placing some constitutional limit on the sentencing schemes adopted by state legislatures.

In an age of mass incarceration and excessive spending on punishment, this blind deference state courts show state legislatures should end. This article demonstrates how and why state courts should use the …

A Governor's Duty To Ask, Jake Mazeitis

Georgia Law Review

As some federal constitutional protections contract, state constitutions are becoming an increasingly important source of individual rights. But state constitutional development involves either amendment or litigation, processes both slow and costly. Ten states offer a third path: They empower governors to request advisory opinions from their supreme courts. These governors, however, have rarely exercised this power.

This article argues that a governor’s refusal to seek such advice violates the constitutional duty to faithfully execute the law; specifically, the law respecting the separation of powers. Drawing on an empirical analysis, I first show that governors are generally shy to ask for …

Historical Practice At The Founding, Ryan Snyder

Faculty Publications

In recent years, the Supreme Court has increasingly relied on historical practice—actions other than judicial decisions that implement the law after its adoption. That creates tension with the Court’s professed adherence to originalism—the view that a law’s meaning is fixed at the time of its adoption. To resolve this tension, the Court and many scholars have embraced theories such as “liquidation,” which argue that the Founders themselves used practice to update or change the law’s meaning over time. But until now, no one has systematically examined whether the Founders accepted those theories.

This Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of …

Dead Infants And Taking The Fifth, Tracey Maclin

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Essay offers tribute to Professor Colb's teachings and insights expressed in her writings on the Court's Miranda and Self-Incrimination Clause rulings. Since the start of the twenty-first century, Professor Colb wrote many blogs on the Court's Miranda doctrine. Miranda v. Arizona famously held that persons under arrest must be warned of their right to silence and to have counsel's advice before being subject to interrogation. Generally speaking, Professor Colb was critical of the Court's results and reasoning—for good reason.

As someone who supports a broad interpretation of the Fifth Amendment, I offer a counterview of Professor Colb's conception of …

Constitutional Law Application In The Sport Industry, Barbara Osborne

Marquette Sports Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Irony Of Humphrey's Executor & The Separation Of Powers Doctrine, Nicholas R. Barrow

St. Thomas Law Review

The vestiges of the Humphrey’s Executor1 exception for independent agencies are crumbling. Just as with Chevron, the Roberts Court—particularly in the turbulent wake of Free Enterprise, Lucia, and Seila Law—has seemed to suggest that Humphrey’s days are numbered. When Consumers’ Research v. Consumer Product Safety Commission finally arrived at the doorstep of the high Court, the inevitable had seemingly arrived—Humphrey’s was finally to fall. Yet there were not four votes to hear the case. The Fifth Circuit was so hotly divided amongst itself as to Humphrey’s continued meaning and applicability to modern administrative agencies that a bare-thin majority (9-8) concluded …

Clarifying The Constitutional Boundaries Of Income Taxation After Moore V. United States, Catherine Gluchowski

St. Thomas Law Review

Despite the significance of the term “income,” both the United States Supreme Court and the Internal Revenue Code do not provide an explicit definition of the term. This ambiguity causes the constitutionality of income taxation to remain a contested issue. Central to this ongoing debate is the issue of realization as a prerequisite for income taxation, exemplified by the case of Moore v. United States. In a landmark decision, the Ninth Circuit ruled that realization is not a constitutional requirement for Congress to impose a tax exempt from apportionment under the Sixteenth Amendment. This decision marked a pivotal departure from …

Survival Of The Social Interest: Redefining The Bruen Standard To Protect Women From Violence Through United States V. Rahimi, Katelyn M. Sundstrom

Lewis & Clark Law Review

This Note explores the intersection of gun rights and gender-based violence within the U.S. legal system. It delves into the pervasive issue of domestic violence and explores the 2022 Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which rejected the use of “interest balancing” in evaluating gun regulations in favor of a purely historical and traditional approach. This shift placed significant legal scrutiny on existing firearm restrictions, including 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms.

The analysis centers on the 2023 case United States v. Rahimi, …

Cost–Benefit Analysis, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter will address the place of cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in constitutional law, by way of a case study. I’ll describe, and puzzle over, CBA’s absence from most U.S. constitutional doctrines, notwithstanding its major role in U.S. administrative law. The general questions that I seek to illuminate are by no means limited to the U.S. How might CBA figure within the tests that constitutional courts use to adjudicate alleged violations of constitutional rights? How might it serve to determine the structure of constitutional institutions? Would it be justified for CBA to play these doctrinal roles? But these general questions are …

Brief Of Professors Julian Arato, Rachel Brewster, Harlan Grant Cohen, David Singh Grewal, J. Benton Heath, Timothy Meyer, Gregory Shaffer, And Chantal Thomas As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners In No. 24-1287 And Respondents In No. 25-250, Julian Arato, Rachel Brewster, Harlan Grant Cohen, David Singh Grewal, J. Benton Heath, Timothy Meyer, Gregory Shaffer, Chantal Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What Belongs In A Constitutional Law Casebook?, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Teaching Firearms Law: One Big Opportunity And Three Pedagogical Challenges, Joseph Blocher, Jacob D. Charles, Darrell A.H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court’s groundbreaking 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller ushered in a new era for the Second Amendment: one in which the right to keep and bear arms, long dormant as a matter of practical impact and even “embarrassing” as a matter of legal scholarship, vaulted into the front ranks of constitutional law. The Court itself has only revisited the Amendment a few times since then—albeit once by revolutionizing the doctrine. Meanwhile, lower courts have issued thousands of decisions giving shape to the right, while scholars have generated work that is increasingly deep, diverse, and challenging. …

The Unconstitutionality Of Governor Youngkin's Felon Re-Enfranchisement Scheme (Or Lack Thereof): An Examination Of Hawkins V. Youngkin'S Challenge To Virginia's Current Felon Re-Enfranchisement Scheme, Olivia Rovin

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

This Note argues that Governor Youngkin’s felon re-enfranchisement “scheme” violates the Constitution. Ultimately, I will be evaluating the argument made in Hawkins v. Youngkin, formerly known as Nolef Turns v. Youngkin, noting its strengths and its weaknesses. Part I describes both American history and Virginia’s specific history of denying people convicted of felonies their right to vote. It also details the Supreme Court case, Richardson v. Ramirez, in which the Court held that denying people convicted of a felony the right to vote is constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause. Part I also gives a brief history …

Pozen And The Puzzle Of Counterfactuals, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Constitution and the War on Drugs, David Pozen’s carefully researched and brilliantly argued book, is both illuminating and disturbing: illuminating because it unearths forgotten moments when judicially formulated constitutional doctrine that could have ended or sharply restricted the War on Drugs were well within the Overton Window, and disturbing because it surfaces hard questions about historical contingency and the scope of the change that might have occurred in a counterfactual world. In this review, the author argues that the failure to specify both the nature of the counterfactual and the breadth of the alternative possibility have confused discussions …

Family Regulation's Consent Problem, Anna Arons

Faculty Publications

The home is the most protected space in constitutional law. But family regulation investigators conduct millions of home searches a year. Under pressure, parents nearly always consent to these state agents’ entry into the most private areas of their lives.

This Article identifies the coercive forces—not least the threat of family separation—that drive parents to consent to home searches. Drawing on primary sources and case law examining consent in criminal cases, it shows that common family regulation investigation tactics render consent involuntary and the ensuing searches unconstitutional. And yet, it argues, the Constitution is not enough. Though constitutional litigation could …

Minor V. Happersett, Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, And The Supreme Court's Refusal To Reconstruct America, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

One hundred and fifty years ago, in the wake of the ratification of the Reconstruction Amendments, the United States Supreme Court decided Minor v. Happersett. In Minor, the Court ruled Missouri could continue to deny women the right to vote based on their sex. The decision was simply reasoned. In the absence of clear constitutional text requiring Missouri to provide the right to vote to women or proof that the right to vote was a right of citizenship, Missouri had no obligation to allow women to vote. Some states had banned women citizens from voting since the country’s founding. Missouri …

The Miserly Message Of Grants Pass, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Grants Pass v. Johnson condoned states’ attempts to police homeless encampments. This was a significant blow to unhoused individuals and their allies. But the Court’s opinion also continued its march away from the longstanding evolving-standards-of-decency approach in Eighth Amendment cases. Grants Pass was something of an odd case in which to grant certiorari, but it served as an opportunity for the Court to send a quiet message that it would continue narrowing the Eighth Amendment’s scope. As in other recent cases, the Court applied a more historical approach than the one traditionally used in …

Who Decides: The Role Of Parental Rights In Abortion And Gender-Affirming-Care Decisions For Minors, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The American legal system presumes that children’s interests are best protected by their parents and, secondarily, by the state’s parens patriae authority. Yet this structure falters when parental authority and state power are infused with political and ideological agendas. This Essay examines how these dynamics have distorted decision-making authority in two contexts—minors’ access to abortion and gender-affirming medical care—and allowed children’s welfare and autonomy to be sacrificed to partisan aims. The law is inconsistent on the role of parental rights—typically empowering parents to grant or withhold consent to a minor’s abortion but categorically stripping them of the power to consent …

“In Defiance Of Gifts”: The Dutch Origins Of The Foreign Emoluments Clause, Liam E. Cronan

Touro Law Review

Starting in 2017, a series of lawsuits against President Donald Trump grounded their arguments on a long-overlooked portion of the Constitution: the Foreign Emoluments Clause, which in its most basic form bans government officials from accepting gifts, or “emoluments,” from foreign entities. Until 2017, few courts or scholars had ever scrutinized this provision. But with Trump’s presidency and enduring reports of his foreign business dealings, this oft-shunned area of the law suddenly garnered the attention of courts and scholars alike. Because of a clear “lack of precedent” on this matter, federal judges soon parsed historical records to determine the Clause’s …

On Guido Calabresi, Roger K. Newman

Touro Law Review

Few individuals have had as long and as influential a career in law as Guido Calabresi. Cofounder of the field of law and economics, teacher, dean, and judge, he has inspired (and infuriated) multitudes. On the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where he has served for thirty years (while continuing to teach until recently), his creativity and doctrinal innovations continue apace. He has urged the academy, legislature, and bench alike to engage in continuing conversation to improve the law and its effect upon those to whom it acts. One of these areas is certification—the practice of …

The Abuses Of History In Constitutional Interpretation, Sherif Girgis

Journal Articles

From the Article

Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority powerfully describes the kaleidoscopic quality of historical arguments in constitutional law. The book also moves easily between description and prescription. This Essay explores whether it moves too easily from one to the other. I consider whether the book’s analysis is so keen to capture our actual practices that it leaves itself too few resources for evaluating them—whether its account of history’s uses, made expansive by a zeal to fit how lawyers actually reason, crowds out any robust account of how they ought not to reason. While I am inclined to think so, …